Education vs.

Seller Support Needs

Despite DTI having made a strong investment in education, from webinars and seminars up to this point,
numerous sellers have indicated that the requirements are difficult to follow and apply.The votes are
indicative that in respect to managing regulatory schemes, the sellers demand more easily understood
and accessibly applied tools.

This qualitative analysis by the findings of the sellers has noted the need for workshops, advisory
services and practical guides in helping a seller-most especially those found in rural areas-assure
compliance. Although significant, the DTI's efforts to offer educational support should be more extensive
and targeted to the individual needs of the sellers. A gap in support and education highlights the need
for more accessible and effective instruments that would allow the sellers to understand the regulatory
regime and to be assured that they are not violating the legislation for consumer protection.

Integration of Data Analysis and Theoretical Framework

Perceived Seller Competence

Perceived seller competence, which relates belief that a seller possesses high-quality service. Perceived
seller Competence, which is conviction that a seller can manufacture top-class goods and services and
meet his or her promises helps instil trust. This conforms to the conceptual model in that many of times,
a buyer's belief is founded upon a seller's capability. Results of this study ascertain existence of
perceived competence plays a central role in establishing early online confidence in transactions (Mayer,
Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). find that customers often rely on product reviews, seller reputations, and
product information to assess the ability of a seller. Product reviews are one essential aspect of
establishing competence, as seen through the average rating of 3.70 for their importance. In fact, 79% of
respondents reported reading the reviews every time Before a purchase, the close connection between
perceived competency and customer trust is underlined.

To some extent, customers had qualitative interviews in which rating was indicated to be the best
indicator that the seller is competent enough. One of respondents noted that reading more positive
ratings all the way makes them more comfortable that the vendor will provide honest information. This
later

reduces further reservations that may have ensued about the quality of that product. Vendors argued
that showing confidence helped build trust through greater details of the product described and open
listings.

As Mayer et al. (1995) and Liang & Turban (2011) have proved, such integration of these data with the
theoretical framework supports that perceived competence is an essential factor in facilitating trust.
Clear communication and obvious seller competency displays are very essential, according to both the
theoretical and the empirical discovery.
Perceived Seller Intention and Benevolence

Perceived seller intention reflects the belief that a seller acts with good A crucial element of
benevolence in trust theory, perceived seller intention represents the conviction that a seller behaves
with good intentions. Customers use indicators like seller behavior, social proof, and communication
styles to determine kindness in social commerce, when face-to-face encounter is scarce. Customers are
more inclined to trust a seller who acts in the buyer's best interests, according to trust theory.
This is corroborated by survey results, which show that 58% of participants look at a seller's follower
count before making a purchase, indicating that buyers may link a high follower count to seller
intentions.
This notion was supported by qualitative respondents, who said that a vendor with a sizable following
demonstrated dependability and a dedication to client happiness.
Nonetheless, the interviews highlighted worries regarding the genuineness of followers, as some
participants indicated that fraudulent followers could erode trust. This corresponds with the theoretical
claim presented by Cialdini (1984) and Lang & Turban(2011), who examined the significance of genuine
social proof in indicating seller intentions. When buyers believe that social proof (like reviews or
follower counts) is authentic, they tend to have greater trust in the seller's goodwill.

Perceived Seller Integrity and Consumer Protection Visibility

Perceived seller Integrity, one of the aspects of trust, is defined as a belief in honesty, ethics, and
adherence to ethical business practices. For social commerce, consumer protection, to what extent it is
made visible, has a great influence on the integrity perception. It shows that compliance with regulation
and awareness of consumer protection are essential in establishing trust. According to the survey, the
seller compliance score is at an average of 2.98 with the respondents frequently inquiring about the
compliance factors, for instance, safety certification of the product and adherence to consumer rights.
During interviews, buyers and sellers indicated that there was a need for communication on compliance
with consumer protection laws as it relates to perceptions of integrity. Buyers were more likely to have
confidence in the vendors who had clear communication on consumer protection, and vendors
discovered that Ensuring compliance was a consideration in consumer trust building.
These conclusions are in agreement with the studies of Sarker et al. (2020) and Pei et al. (2024), which
showed that consumer protection practices in compliance with regulations and being transparent
enhanced perceived seller integrity. A supporting argument to the concept model is the fact that
consumers are likely to consider a seller reliable when it is believed that the same seller acts ethically.

Perceived Risk and trust Competence

The risk or fear of a transaction may result in poor outcomes such as receiving bad products, wrong
delivery, or no delivery at all. For social commerce, perceived risk is a variable that influences consumer
trust.The theory of trust indicates that reducing perceived risks enhances trust, and this study's results
are aligned with the perspective. Overall, it was evident from the questionnaire that there was a general
concern about the failure of the product to be delivered errors, and non-delivery issues. With mean
scores of 2.52 (defective items), 2.42 (delivery errors), and 2.09 (non-delivery), many respondents
indicated the risks that come along with online shopping. Through qualitative Interviews, it came out
that such risks were seen as the major barriers to trust; buyers fear loss of money and low quality
products.

To reduce such perceived risks, both the buyers and sellers emphasized effective communication and
reliable delivery mechanisms. product warranties. Vendors who explicitly declared their return policies
and quality guarantee of the product were rated as more trustable by customers. These results validate
the conceptual claim that risk reduction is essential for trust improvement, as argued by Mayer et al.
(1995).

The Role of Social Proof in Trust-Building

Social proof is very important because, in the absence of physical interactions, trust can easily be
established. The social proof concept of establishing trust is well detailed in both the theory on trust and
practical studies.Consumers rely much on metrics that include product reviews, seller rating, and
follower counts evaluate the credibility of sellers. The survey conducted revealed that 79% of the
respondents always read product reviews, and 58% rely on follower counts to evaluate trustworthiness.
These findings are in line with Grange et al. (2020) and Tiwasing et al. (2022), who reported that social
proof significantly reduces perceived risk and helps establish trust, especially in online and social
commerce environments. Buyers and sellers in interviews acknowledged that social proof signals such as
positive reviews and a huge number of followers played a significant role in establishing credibility and
trust.

Comparison with Literature and Previous Studies

The results showed that factors such as product reviews, product descriptions, and seller popularity
influence trust in sellers.Most importantly, 79% of the participants acknowledged that product reviews
significantly contribute to trust building. This is in line with research carried out by Sung et al. (2023) and
Yang et al. (2019), which pointed out that social proof factors, such as reviews, ratings, and followers,
greatly impact the development of consumer trust in online and social commerce platforms. However,
some studies such as Sarker et al. (2020) and Pei et al. (2024) argue that even though social proof is
valuable, consumers can evaluate the trustworthiness of such cues differently. For instance, the study
qualitative interviews pointed out issues concerning fake reviews or followers that were also highlighted
by Barrantes et al. (2019), who looked at the risks of misleading social proof. This can explain why
certain respondents avoid relying solely on these metrics, and stresses the fact that regulatory
conditions should ensure authenticity.

From the results, it appears that a seller's reputation is relevant to trust building due to its reliance on
buyer perceptions based on product offers, consumer reviews, and the ratings of a seller. This research
finding also supports the theories of Mayer, Davis & Schoorman (1995) as well as Liang & Turban (2011,
who argue that perceived competence is paramount in building trust in e-communications. Mayer et al.
(1995) noted that competence has a significant role in e-commerce, as the consumer cannot rely on
traditional, face-to-face cues to assess a seller. This focus on capability is exemplified by the survey,
which shows that respondents valued product reviews highly; the average score was 3.70.

However, open-ended interviews showed that some consumers still To be skeptical about sellers'
expertise, especially in rural areas where information to confirm claims might be limited. Unlike Grange
et al. (2020), it was suggested that more developed online markets (e.g., in city environments) have
greater trust in seller competency due to better reputation systems. This difference may be attributed to
the rural setting of the study, in which trust-building measures are less developed compared to urban or
highly regulated e-commerce settings.

The study found out that trust depends on a seller's integrity, along with visible consumer protections,
as such, participants seek signs that show compliance could be in form of product safety certifications,
supporting the research conducted by Sarker et al. (2020), and Pei et al. (2024, who showed that

customers consider following the regulations as being a huge aspect of being trustworthy to a seller,.
Qualitative interviews additionally showed that buyers trusted more sellers who were able to
communicate that they complied with consumer protection regulations. This aligns with Barrantes et al.
(2019), who noted that sellers who are transparent in their ethical practices and compliance with laws
are considered more reliable. However, there may still be disparities between the urban and the rural
regions, as in Itliong (2020), which underlined that rural regions often do not have the infrastructure
needed to implement consumer protection laws properly. This may explain some of the discrepancies in
the results, especially when analyzing the effect of consumer protection visibility in rural compared to
urban settings.

The study focused on concerns about perceived risk, such as delivery mistakes and failure to deliver that
constituted some of the common problems encountered by respondents. Specifically, 52% of
respondents were concerned about delivery mistakes (mean score 2.42), and 33% reported problems
with particularly in developing markets where logistics and quality control systems might be inadequate.
One of the main differences observed in the study is the direct link between delivery issues and trust.
While Abeabe et al. Pandey (2022) acknowledged that logistic errors have lowered trust, they were
silent on the effect of rural infrastructure in deteriorating these problems. This would perhaps explain
why participants showed heightened concerns during the research because rural regions often face
logistical problems not found in urban regions.

Social proof: product review count, ratings, number of followers by the seller emerged as an important
determinant of trust, as 79% of respondents scanned reviews and 58% evaluated a seller's followers.
This finding is consistent with Cialdini (1984), who proposed that social proof has an important influence
on consumer behavior. The concept of social proof as a tool for building trust is discussed by Do (2021)
and Rachmad (2022), who found that buyers in marketplaces heavily rely on Social proof to rate the
authenticity of a seller, especially where face-to-face contact is limited. However, the study found that
fears regarding the authenticity of social proof, such as fake reviews or inflated following, were also
prevalent. This finding resonates well with Barrantes et al. (2019), who highlighted that deceptive social
proof was an effective way to reduce consumer trust. Differences in the findings may be due to the fact
that the study took place in a rural context where consumers could be more prone to fraudulent
activities due to their lack of knowledge about sophisticated online shopping sites.

Problems met and Solutions offered

One of the main challenges that the researchers faced during the study was was the fight to reach out to
the target population through online surveys.

This problem has changed the original strategy of relying solely on a online survey, inappropriate for
people who are not interested in clicking the Provided link and does not guarantee that the required
number of residents from Bustos, Bulacan, will be reached.

To overcome this, the researchers decided to revise the methodology and used printed handouts to
distribute personally to the target population. Additionally, the initial plan to use a survey questionnaire
was revised. The researchers then decided to add semi-structured interviews, as relying solely on
questionnaire was not enough to properly address the experiences and thoughts of the respondents
regarding social commerce.
Time constraints also became a problem for the study, as the collection of responses from the survey
and interview were conducted in a limited time, which also makes the analysis of data done in a short
time. The researchers mitigated this by distributing the tasks of handing the physical copies of the
questionnaire among the team members, where they conducted it alone with a required quota to reach.
This is done along with
the use of Google Forms and actively reaching out to people who can help them reach the number of
respondents needed. The interview was done simultaneously, where some members work on readying
the papers. This ensures the timely completion of the questionnaire while ensuring the quality of the
data.